The Warren County School District will pay a total of $28,000 to a group of parents who successfully took the district to federal court over its attempt to end around school mask regulations.

The suit was brought by the parents of nine students who were not named in any court filings. The suit resulted in a consent order that required the district to “comply with the August Department of Health order as interpreted by the September Pennsylvania Department of Education directive” that mandated masks in schools.

The court left the plaintiffs with the opportunity to petition for payment of their costs and attorney fees by the district.

WCSD Solicitor Chris Byham consulted special counsel appointed in the case and detailed those fees.

“The District and the Plaintiffs, through their respective attorneys” Byham said Monday, “very recently agreed to the District paying the Plaintiffs’ costs and attorney fees in the amount of $28,000.”

“The District did not pay any damages to the Plaintiffs,” he added. “The only money paid by the District was the Plaintiffs costs and attorney fees in the amount of $28,000. The $28,000, less the District’s deductible in the amount of $10,000, was paid by the District’s insurance carrier.”

The consent order entered by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania details a timeline of the mask mandate and the district’s response.

On Aug. 31, the acting Secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Health issued an “order directing face coverings in school entities” requiring face coverings in schools starting Sept. 7.

The Pennsylvania Department of Health sent “a directive to all school districts” saying the order was “not a mask optional policy and that any exception… must include evidence that a student has a medical or mental health condition or disability that precludes the wearing of a face covering” on Sept. 10.

“On Sept. 13, the school board… voted to modify the district’s facemask policy to allow parents/guardians to sign a form excepting their students from the requirement to wear a face covering without providing any evident…”

The suit was filed Oct. 4, requesting a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against that modification of the policy.

The court issued the requested temporary restraining order following an Oct. 5 hearing.

And, on Oct. 8, the board voted to rescind the policy change and comply with the August order.

The August order was ultimately struck down by the state Supreme Court late last year.